- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,863
- Reaction score
- 30,126
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
The article keeps calling them business men and about what a groundbreaking moment this was in their lives then quotes the guy saying something like 'this isnt gonna happen' indicating leaving the store.
LOL, it's amazing how righties never read links. Good god, I guess I should have posted this article instead. None of you seem to be able to get past a headline:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/starbucks-arrest-rashon-nelson-donte-robinson-feared-for-their-lives/
I watched the other video. They claimed that they couldn't believe they were getting arrested and admitted to calling their friend, but couldn't simply say, "we're going to have to go somewhere else because they are asking us to leave"? I don't get that part. They could easily have done that and filed discrimination charges. People were filming by then. They would have at least some evidence.
The policy is left to individual stores. That may be the problem. But at the same time, not every store faces the same situations, such as homeless or others who abuse their restrooms, forcing some Starbucks to weigh denying access so that they don't have to be constantly cleaning those restrooms and possibly denying someone access who will complain, especially to the media or allowing access to all and having to do a helluva lot more work (because most such places do not increase personnel for such things). It is a rock and a hard place. Some stores have simply closed off or completely removed public restrooms. The answer just isn't so simple.
[UPDATE] Toilet Terror: Starbucks Closing Its NYC Restrooms To EVERYONE: Gothamist
There needs to be some understanding by the public. I understand, at least to a point, because I've worked as a manager in retail. When we got our portable dressing rooms, someone peed in one (or allowed their pet or child to) and did not clean it up, so we had to. It was on the floor. Others were upset that we could close the regular fitting rooms early or not open them until later unlike other stores in the chain which didn't get the portable dressing rooms (we were a test store). Since we did get to close early, the store was also given less money for staff to cover those hours. Some stores in the chain have restrooms behind locked doors, which means someone had to run back there in our store at least to push the button to open the door to the restroom. Plenty of complaints on that one, especially during busy months. Not all stores in the chain have locks on their restroom doors though. (For retail stores, its more a security thing so that people aren't shoplifting while using our restrooms.) All of this goes into how much staff a store needs for any given time of day, and that means crappy working conditions for current employees at such businesses if they are thrown to the wolves that are customers who can't understand why they don't always get to use things for free.
This one says police asked them to leave and they refused so they were arrested.
Did the employee create a situation out of nothing? Yes.
Everybody agrees... what is it you are adding to the discussion?
Can't debate with facts. Check.
Cool. You are on the list.
Oh what the fudge ever. I mean, their were loitering and asked to leave by both management and then the police and they refused. For the love of all that is holy, why boycott it?
Because, while other restaurants get you in and out as fast as they can so other customers can pay money, Starbucks took a different approach from the very beginning. The Starbucks concept is to offer customers an "office away from office". I personally have spent a couple of hours inside a Starbucks creating a proposal for a customer, and not buying coffee for the first 15 or 20 minutes I was there. of course I am white. Whoever is responsible for having the 2 black guys arrested is a racist asshole who needs to be fired for giving Starbucks a bad name. The real irony here is that the 2 black guys were waiting to have a meeting with a white guy over coffee, and were polite enough to wait for the white guy to show up before ordering. Being polite can get black guys thrown in jail these days, it seems.
Really? Everyone agrees? Then what is being debated?
It's a fair question, and one several patrons also asked.
Everybody agrees on the facts. What is being debated is stupidity by those that agree with the facts but are trying to turn it into something bigger or more sinister than a stupid employee.
It's part of something bigger and more sinister. It didn't happen in a vacuum.
The bias training is the right thing to do. However, bias is socially engendered over a lifetime and a training course cannot correct such a bias, even when those taking the course are open-minded and want to correct any bias they may have. It’s something that an entire society must first accept as necessary and then undertake consciously over the course of generations.
I also do not necessarily think of Starbucks as being “progressive”, as has been said elsewhere in this thread, without evidence supporting such a notion. For instance, what percentage of the 28,000 Starbucks stores have minority or African-American store managers?
Racists are like people who don’t pick up after their dog. The evidence is obvious, but nobody admits to it.
It's part of something bigger and more sinister. It didn't happen in a vacuum.
Prove Starbucks is a racist organization then...
Yes. White people. Got it.
Because, while other restaurants get you in and out as fast as they can so other customers can pay money, Starbucks took a different approach from the very beginning. The Starbucks concept is to offer customers an "office away from office". I personally have spent a couple of hours inside a Starbucks creating a proposal for a customer, and not buying coffee for the first 15 or 20 minutes I was there. of course I am white. Whoever is responsible for having the 2 black guys arrested is a racist asshole who needs to be fired for giving Starbucks a bad name. The real irony here is that the 2 black guys were waiting to have a meeting with a white guy over coffee, and were polite enough to wait for the white guy to show up before ordering. Being polite can get black guys thrown in jail these days, it seems.
It's part of something bigger and more sinister. It didn't happen in a vacuum.
Prove Starbucks is a racist organization then...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?